On 02/15/2014 02:15 PM, John Andersen wrote:
On 2/15/2014 10:29 AM, Anton Aylward wrote:
If you believe there are "induced things" --- side effects ? --- then please make them clear, convince us with evidence, testable examples, rather than fear-mongering.
You mean like this sort of fear mongering:
OUCH! Too 'global'.
zypper --force can have unwanted side effects, just like rpm --force zypper -f is exactly the same as rpm --force.
Your own quote of the man page shows this (did you even read it?)
-f, --force Install even if the item is already installed (reinstall), downgraded or changes vendor or architecture.
In my view architecture is a pretty big risk.
Oh, I agree! But that begs the question: why do you have a repository for a different architecture active? Oh, right, this is software, this is FOSS and you can do anything you damn well please! Well I don't! I can't understand why one might, certainly I can't imagine why I might! Lets look at how *I* use "-f" I run 'zypper up' and it tells me that various packages aren't going to be loaded. Priority, vendor ... Something. So I run zypper info and stuff and find out what is installed and why it isn't going to be installed. Then and only then and only IF there is some reason for installing that version I use the "-f" and I specify the full revision, not just the base package name. I specify EXACTLY what I want installed. EXACTLY!
Plus -f eliminates any warning about a library or file from the new repository being incompatible with existing (and often unrelated) packages using the same library. Vendor change preserves these warnings.
That differs from my experience.
And no, Anton, I'm not going to find you a test case. Feel free to do your own destructive testing regime. I never use -f or --force if there is any way to avoid it, its the quickest route to rpm-hell. I've been there and I'm not going back.
It is uncontrolled and unconsidered use that leads to RPM hell. I've not ended up there the way *I* use "-f". And I don't think that such avoidance is pure luck. When I've used the "-f" to do a very specific 'change vendor' type of operation it has been very specifi and very researched.
Suggesting using --force blindly on a mailing list is irresponsible, especially when allow vender change was put into yast for precisely this type of scenario.
What's with this "using --force blindly" nonsense? I'm suggesting it using it in a highly constrained and focused and considered manner. One might wonder why the "--force" was there in the first place if not to do exactly what I have done with it in the highly constrained circumstances I'm talking about. One might also say that doing the 'change vendor' your way is also risk as the user might forget, for any one of a number reasons/distractions, to change it back. The point here is that any tool can be abused. A sharp knife can cut what you want but can also cut in ways you don't want if you don't take care. Once again, I wonder why you would have active repositories for other architectures? That seems a risky thing to do anyway. -- Leadership is understanding people and involving them to help you do a job. That takes all of the good characteristics, like integrity, dedication of purpose, selflessness, knowledge, skill, implacability, as well as determination not to accept failure. - Admiral Arleigh A. Burke -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org